Statutory revision remedy bars Tribunal appeal where the Finance Act requires recourse to the revisionary authority.

Under the Finance Act, 1994, the maintainability of a challenge depends on the statutory remedy provided. Where Section 86 and the first proviso to Section 35B(i) make the revision application maintainable before the revisionary authority, Government of India, an appeal before CESTAT is not maintainable. The Tribunal followed the cited precedent and dismissed the appeal for want of maintainability, while leaving the party free to pursue the statutory revision remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal was maintainable before the Tribunal or whether the remedy lay before the revisionary authority under the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that, in view of Section 86 and the first proviso to Section 35B(i) of the Finance Act, 1994, the revision application was maintainable before the revisionary authority, Government of India, and not an appeal before the Tribunal. The conclusion was also consistent with the cited Tribunal precedent relied upon by the appellant.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be not maintainable before the Tribunal and the proper remedy was revision before the revisionary authority.

Final Conclusion: The proceeding ended with dismissal of the appeal on the ground of non-maintainability, while preserving liberty to pursue the statutory revision remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute provides a revisionary remedy under the governing service tax framework, an appeal filed before the Tribunal is not maintainable.

---